Lighter weight champs who would have beaten the heavy weight champs of their time?

<3 this thread.

 

It cannot be ruled out that Harry Greb could have beaten the heavyweight champion of his day. He would have been the betting favourite over any of the light heavyweight champions he shared an era with.

Mickey Walker might just have pulled the ultimate upset if he had drawn the right heavyweight champion at the right time.

Jem Mace Bob Fitzsimmons and Tommy Burns are basicaly guys who did it.

 

It has become commonplace nowadays with smaller weight fighters like Jones Jr, Toney and Now Adamek being capable of beating the top guns. When Adamek wins the world championship, he will surely be ranked below Dawson.

In the old days, great lighter weight fighters like Foster used to get blown away by the top heavyweights :hey

 

I like Adamek but I doubt he or Haye could beat either Klitschko... I guess we are going to find out. Dawson at HW? He'd get crushed by the likes of Chris Arreola. Adamek is better at HW than Dawson would be IMO.

Anyway, to answer the original question... a guy below LHW that could win the HW title? Well, first of all he'd most likely have to be from a long ago era when the HW champ was pretty much a LHW anyway. If not, it would have to be done thru some creative match-making.

The guys who did move up and win the HW title were usually close in weight to the Champs they defeated... at fight time anyway.

Fitzsimmons (5'11 1/2", 71 1/2" reach, and 167Lbs) beat Corbett (6'1", 73" reach, and 184Lbs)... both were pretty much LHWs despite the 17Lb weight difference.

Tunney and Dempsey were almost identical in height, reach, and weight. At 6'1", a 72" reach, and 190Lbs; Dempsey was just 1" taller, with an inch longer reach, and 1/2 Lb heavier than Tunney when they fought the first time.

Charles was 6" with a 73" reach and 181 3/4Lbs when he beat Walcott who was 6' with a 74" reach and 195 3/4 Lbs for the vacant HW title in 1949. 14Lbs.

Archie Moore outweighed Patterson by 5 1/2 Lbs when Patterson beat him to win the vacant HW title in 1956.

M. Spinks was 200lbs, 6'2", with a 76" reach when he beat Holmes (6'3" with an 81" reach and 220Lbs) for the HW title.

Jones and Toney were both guys that moved up and beat former CW and WBA HW champ John Ruiz. That's the creative match-making I was talking about. it's not like they beat Leiws or one of the klitschko brothers. Toney's win was changed to a NC anyway. At actual fight time Jones was 199Lbs. and Ruiz was 219 Lbs. Ruiz stood 2 1/2" taller with a 4" longer reach. Ruiz outweighed Toney by 8 Lbs... both men were overweight IMO.

My point? My point is that Bob Fitzsimmons was the only man under LHW that won the HW title. It must be noted that the HW Champ he defeated only weighed 184Lbs. though.

Even a small HW is over 6' tall and 210Lbs these days. I don't see too many SMWs beating a very good (Champion level) 210Lb fighter. Haye is 6'3" with a 78" reach and 215 ripped Lbs and isn't considered a big HW. He would have looked like a fvcking monster compared to Corbett let alone Fitz.

Andre Ward vs. David Haye? I'll take Haye by brutal KO and Ward hasn't even come close to being stopped yet. He hasn't even lost or been down yet.

 

:bbbbump

 

Just because you doubt it, doesnt in the slightest mean it couldnt happen. In fact no matter what anyone says it could happen. (I am not saying it will ). How about this scenario, the two Klitchskos simply decide to retire tomorrow, while both are on top. That leaves probably Haye, Chambers, Chagaev and Adamek as the three in line to be handed belts. not exactly giants.

Maybe, but you dont give Dawson a chance to beat Adamek?

That is the only major difference from then, until today. Back then, bigger was still better, but only better when a fighter was actually naturally bigger. In fact it was previously considered in a fighters best interest to train down in weight. This is still the case today, where guys like the Klitchskos who could easily come in 30lbs heavier drop their weight right down. Other natural heavyweights like Tua, Peter, etc are still considered to be at their best weight when they train down 30lbs but they arent good enough to do it.

The big difference today is that modern science and nutrition has discovered that there is a mythical line where it is not in the interests of an athlete to train down in weight and they are in fact far better fighters if they put on an extra 30 lbs so that they can put their weight behind their punches.

That mythical line has been discovered to be 175 lbs. Once you hit 175 lbs, you have to build up your weight by eating and weight lifting. Without doing this, you will no longer be able to take a punch (it is well known now that neck muscles and weight is the most important thing in developing a chin. this is why an average fighter in the old days fighters like tony Galento and Dan Cockell were able to perform so far above his natural talents. whereas in Todays environment, they would have been just standard run of the mill overweight guys, who could have bulked up even further.

It is also why we now have a cruiserweight division, so that fighters have somewhere to fight when they are trying to bulk up to heavyweight, and they are not forced to fight dangerously underweight and "in shape". This was demonstrated best, recently by Chris Byrd and Roy Jones Jr, who were competive when they bulked up, but when they were forced to get in tip top shape and get their weight down, they could not compete with even average contenders at light heavyweight. We all know that if they had come into those fights 30lbs heavier, they could have knocked out their opponents without any difficulties.

I can safely say, that if his name isnt Bob Fitzsimmons and (arguably) Tommy Burns the light heavyweight who moves and wins the title will come from the future, not the past!

At fight time? I am not sure what you mean by this. Did Fitz cut weight to 158 for the Corbett weigh in, but then put on 10 or 20 lbs after having a good steak after the weigh in?

Was Baer and Braddock clos in weight?

One was 10lbs over the light heavy limit and the other was nearly 20lbs under it. I dont see 2 light heavyweights.

Dempsey also has a tenuous claim to the light heavyweight championship!

I know but it is because of the mythical 30lb line that modern nutrition and science now knows. Imagine what a fool Toney would have made of himself if he had tried to stay in shape and come in to his heavyweight fights against Ruiz (or anyone else) at 175.

Bob Fitzsimmons was lucky to do that. Imagine the beast he would have been, if he pulled a Toney on Corbett and came in at 250 with the help of modern supplements such as Krispy Creme Donuts.

What would they have done? Folded like a deck of cards. Neither fought a World class fighter that big or bigger did they? And if they did, they would surely have been wiped out in 1 round wouldnt they?

How about Adamek vs Dawson, who you got in that one? Adamek by brutal KO?

 

The only example I can think of is Ketchell against Johnson. Middleweight vs Heavyweight for the title. I think Johnson won has he pleased. Anyone know the weights on the night?

 

just looked it up 170 and a quarter to 205 and a half for Johnson.

 

Tommy Ryan seems to have been in really high regard among the early Heavyweight champions, with some of them picking him to beat Dempsey, Tunney, and Jack Johnson even said Ryan would beat Joe Louis!

 

Johnson said some of the most biased, illogical things I've ever read in his analysis of other fighters, particuarly those that came after his time. Talk about rose-tinted glasses.

 

I know that there opinions were very biased, just thought I'd put them out there. i don't agree with any of the assertions made by Sullivan, Corbett, Jeffries or Johnson regarding Ryan's chances against heavyweights.

 

yeah, johnson was disrespectful to louis at the best of times

that being said i agree with walker being able to beat more than a few heavyweight champs (especially those along the burns line that weighed ****ing 180 pounds) as well as greb

in more modern eras, it's tricky but i know jones was talking about fighting moorer in the 90s and while i don't think he'd have won, it's possible.

 

Thinking about this, and looking at the crossover of reigns from light heavy to heavy. You would have to say that Michael Spinks is the best chance of holding both undisputed titles at once.

Anyone here think he could have unified the light heavy and heavy titles, as a light heavy?

 

Since both scaled inside the lhvy limit when they fought for the Hvy title Burns could have claimed O Brien's crown as well .